Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Registered Replication Report on Mazar, Amir, a...

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Registered Replication Report on Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008)

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Registered Replication Report on Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008). / Verschuere, Bruno; Meijer, Ewout H.; McLatchie, Neil Marvin et al.
In: Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, Vol. 1, No. 3, 09.2018, p. 299-317.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Verschuere, B, Meijer, EH, McLatchie, NM, Pennington, CR, Warmelink, LN & Srull-Mazar RRR labs 2018, 'Registered Replication Report on Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008)', Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 299-317. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245918781032

APA

Verschuere, B., Meijer, E. H., McLatchie, N. M., Pennington, C. R., Warmelink, L. N., & Srull-Mazar RRR labs (2018). Registered Replication Report on Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008). Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(3), 299-317. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245918781032

Vancouver

Verschuere B, Meijer EH, McLatchie NM, Pennington CR, Warmelink LN, Srull-Mazar RRR labs. Registered Replication Report on Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008). Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science. 2018 Sept;1(3):299-317. Epub 2018 Sept 4. doi: 10.1177/2515245918781032

Author

Verschuere, Bruno ; Meijer, Ewout H. ; McLatchie, Neil Marvin et al. / Registered Replication Report on Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008). In: Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science. 2018 ; Vol. 1, No. 3. pp. 299-317.

Bibtex

@article{45bcd581b4dd42a689057b526be78c9c,
title = "Registered Replication Report on Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008)",
abstract = "The self-concept maintenance theory holds that many people will cheat in order to maximize self-profit, but only to the extent that they can do so while maintaining a positive self-concept. Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008, Experiment 1) gave participants an opportunity and incentive to cheat on a problem-solving task. Prior to that task, participants either recalled the Ten Commandments (a moral reminder) or recalled 10 books they had read in high school (a neutral task). Results were consistent with the self-concept maintenance theory. When given the opportunity to cheat, participants given the moral-reminder priming task reported solving 1.45 fewer matrices than did those given a neutral prime (Cohen{\textquoteright}s d = 0.48); moral reminders reduced cheating. Mazar et al.{\textquoteright}s article is among the most cited in deception research, but their Experiment 1 has not been replicated directly. This Registered Replication Report describes the aggregated result of 25 direct replications (total N = 5,786), all of which followed the same preregistered protocol. In the primary meta-analysis (19 replications, total n = 4,674), participants who were given an opportunity to cheat reported solving 0.11 more matrices if they were given a moral reminder than if they were given a neutral reminder (95% confidence interval = [−0.09, 0.31]). This small effect was numerically in the opposite direction of the effect observed in the original study (Cohen{\textquoteright}s d = −0.04).",
author = "Bruno Verschuere and Meijer, {Ewout H.} and McLatchie, {Neil Marvin} and Pennington, {Charlotte Rebecca} and Warmelink, {Lara Natasja} and {Srull-Mazar RRR labs}",
year = "2018",
month = sep,
doi = "10.1177/2515245918781032",
language = "English",
volume = "1",
pages = "299--317",
journal = "Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science",
publisher = "Sage",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Registered Replication Report on Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008)

AU - Verschuere, Bruno

AU - Meijer, Ewout H.

AU - McLatchie, Neil Marvin

AU - Pennington, Charlotte Rebecca

AU - Warmelink, Lara Natasja

AU - Srull-Mazar RRR labs

PY - 2018/9

Y1 - 2018/9

N2 - The self-concept maintenance theory holds that many people will cheat in order to maximize self-profit, but only to the extent that they can do so while maintaining a positive self-concept. Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008, Experiment 1) gave participants an opportunity and incentive to cheat on a problem-solving task. Prior to that task, participants either recalled the Ten Commandments (a moral reminder) or recalled 10 books they had read in high school (a neutral task). Results were consistent with the self-concept maintenance theory. When given the opportunity to cheat, participants given the moral-reminder priming task reported solving 1.45 fewer matrices than did those given a neutral prime (Cohen’s d = 0.48); moral reminders reduced cheating. Mazar et al.’s article is among the most cited in deception research, but their Experiment 1 has not been replicated directly. This Registered Replication Report describes the aggregated result of 25 direct replications (total N = 5,786), all of which followed the same preregistered protocol. In the primary meta-analysis (19 replications, total n = 4,674), participants who were given an opportunity to cheat reported solving 0.11 more matrices if they were given a moral reminder than if they were given a neutral reminder (95% confidence interval = [−0.09, 0.31]). This small effect was numerically in the opposite direction of the effect observed in the original study (Cohen’s d = −0.04).

AB - The self-concept maintenance theory holds that many people will cheat in order to maximize self-profit, but only to the extent that they can do so while maintaining a positive self-concept. Mazar, Amir, and Ariely (2008, Experiment 1) gave participants an opportunity and incentive to cheat on a problem-solving task. Prior to that task, participants either recalled the Ten Commandments (a moral reminder) or recalled 10 books they had read in high school (a neutral task). Results were consistent with the self-concept maintenance theory. When given the opportunity to cheat, participants given the moral-reminder priming task reported solving 1.45 fewer matrices than did those given a neutral prime (Cohen’s d = 0.48); moral reminders reduced cheating. Mazar et al.’s article is among the most cited in deception research, but their Experiment 1 has not been replicated directly. This Registered Replication Report describes the aggregated result of 25 direct replications (total N = 5,786), all of which followed the same preregistered protocol. In the primary meta-analysis (19 replications, total n = 4,674), participants who were given an opportunity to cheat reported solving 0.11 more matrices if they were given a moral reminder than if they were given a neutral reminder (95% confidence interval = [−0.09, 0.31]). This small effect was numerically in the opposite direction of the effect observed in the original study (Cohen’s d = −0.04).

U2 - 10.1177/2515245918781032

DO - 10.1177/2515245918781032

M3 - Journal article

VL - 1

SP - 299

EP - 317

JO - Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science

JF - Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science

IS - 3

ER -